RE: [picocontainer-dev] [6.2/6.0] Re: [picocontainer-dev] Bug or feature?

--- Jörg Schaible <[email protected]>

> Main reasoning was, that keeping a pointer in any CA
> for the Pico is a simply waste and the coupling may
> arise even problems. 

At the moment we have waste in interface and ugly 
resolution of container in question. ( 2 times ) 

> The Pico is only necessary at
> resolution time, therefore it was provided with the
> CA's interface. No need for the CA to keep the
> refernce also. Additionally it made problems when
> the CA was saved in a session, since it triggered
> always the complete Pico hierarchy. 
This could be solved by means of transiency. 
> The CA instance
> was meant to be a fly-weigh type, therefore also my
> steady proposal to drop the key also. Why is it
> interesting for the CA to know the key that key that
> have been used to store it in the Pico?

Actually it IS interesting for adapter  - current 
(trunk) resolution modality is to obtain an adapter
( potentially from parent container ) and retrieve 
value by key from the leaf container. 

So, not so flyweight anymore...

regards,

----[ Konstantin Pribluda http://www.pribluda.de ]----------------
JTec quality components: http://www.pribluda.de/projects/


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better sports nut!  Let your teams follow you 
with Yahoo Mobile. Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/sports;_ylt=At9_qDKvtAbMuh1G1SQtBI7ntAcJ

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email